That’s right, John Bolton, the guy who has been trying to start a war with Russia since long before the name Vladimir Putin meant anything to the average Democrat, is being accused of colluding with Russia. Count on Democrats to oppose the most virulent neocon in Washington by accusing him of not being hawkish enough.

“John Bolton once suggested Russian hack of DNC may have been a false flag operation by Obama Admin,” fretted lead Democratic Russiagater Adam Schiff, mistaking brazen partisan hackery for actual skepticism about a likely intelligence community false flag.

“Don’t forget the reason for H.R. McMaster’s departure: He criticized Russia,” added Democratic Coalition co-founder Scott Dworkin. “McMaster said publicly that Russia needed to face serious consequences for what they’ve done in Syria & for the gas attack in the UK. John Bolton would never say anything like that.”

“Trump has outdone himself by selecting Bolton,” Democratic Rep. Ted Deutch tweeted with a link to a story about Bolton having appeared in a 2013 video for a Russian gun rights group. “In one appointment, he simultaneously increased the influence of the NRA in his Admin. & found another way to tie himself to Russia. Does he still claim he hires the best people? #TrumpRussia.”

“Bolton is *pre-indictment* for many crimes against America,” tweeted renowned professional intelligence LARPer Eric Garland.

There are of course many, many, many extremely legitimate reasons to criticize John Bolton, and none of them involve being too soft on Russia. Not only is he a PNAC signatory who played a major role in manufacturing the lies that led to the Iraq invasion, but he still insists that that invasion was a great idea. He’s advocated for escalations and acts of military violence against every single government that is in any way oppositional to US hegemony including Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia and China, and account after account of his personal behavior toward people he’s worked with indicate that he is in all likelihood an actual, literal psychopath.

But Democratic opposition to Bolton, even when it doesn’t get sucked up into idiotic Russia conspiracy theory, appears to be receiving a relatively lukewarm response from mainstream America. It certainly isn’t attracting the urgent attention it should be, and certainly isn’t eliciting the level of viral interest as a new “bombshell” Russiagate revelation. And why should it? Propagandists have been pacing rank-and-file Democrats into embracing Iraq-raping Bush-era neocons for more than a year now.

In addition to Democrats being forced to spend 2016 gaslighting themselves into believing that a warmongering neocon who supported the Iraq war would make a great First Female President, they have also been manipulated by the cult of blind anti-Trumpism into accepting neoconservative death worshippers like Bill Kristol, David Frum and Max Boot into their #Resistance fold.

“One of the most amazing outcomes of the Trump administration is the number of neo-conservatives that are now my friends and I am aligned with,” MSNBC pundit Joy Reid openly admitted in an interview last year. “I found myself agreeing on a panel with Bill Kristol. I agree more with Jennifer Rubin, David Frum, and Max Boot than I do with some people on the far left. I am shocked at the way that Donald Trump has brought people together.”

I once scoffed at claims of “white male privilege,” dismissing such criticisms as mere “political correctness.” But in the Trump era I have had my consciousness raised. Seriously. Me in @ForeignPolicy: https://t.co/OpgCFew2cF

Just as Bolton has cozied up to the Trump crowd by disguising his brazen neoconservative globalism as libertarian-leaning nationalism, neocons like Frum, Boot and Kristol who helped decimate Iraq have been cozying up to mainstream Democrats by posing as woke progressives, and now they’re in like Flynn. Dems had to stretch and compartmentalize their thinking to accommodate the other Bush-era neocons, and even Bush himself to a large extent, so why would a few experts saying “Uh seriously this Bolton guy is deeply terrifying” have any influence over them? They already had to gaslight themselves into believing the bloodshed caused by neoconservatism is fine.

So the American mainstream has been successfully manipulated on both sides of the artificial political divide into supporting vestigial Bush neocons, with #TheResistance proudly retweeting depraved death cultists like Bill Kristol while a majority of the #MAGA crowd support Trump’s elevation of Bolton, and now there’s no one left but us homeless nonpartisans to point and scream about where this all seems to be headed.

Partisan hack Trump supporters are worthless. Partisan hack Democrats are equally worthless. Only those who have awakened from the relentless barrage of mass media psyops and seen beyond the fake uniparty trap can see what’s going on. It’s up to us to awaken everyone else.

Share

Latest comments

I apologize for my last comment. I asked over at Newsbud about their evidence that Beeley & Bartlett have gotten some funding & assistance from the Syrian government. Apparently there’s a mix of sources, some more questionable than others. But, Edmonds also said that “the duo” have not been making any secret about this. If it’s been disclosed, then I don’t see that Beeley & Bartlett have done anything wrong. Apparently the only problem was my own ignorance.

Johny Conspiranoid/March 25, 2018

“The fact that @sibeledmonds has continued her laser-focused crusade to wedge @VanessaBeeley and @EvaKBartlett out of alt media circles following Bolton’s horrifying addition to the Trump admin tells you everything you need to know about who she is and what she really cares about.”

Not fair. Edmond’s site (newsbud.com) quickly came out with an editorial from Kurt Nimmo, criticizing Bolton’s appointment.

I see at least one substantial concern from Edmonds about Beeley & Bartlett. She thinks they’re funded by the Syrian government, and she says she can prove it. That calls for a serious response, don’t you think?

I confess I’ve been trying to avoid spending the time to watch the entire 70 minutes. Apparently Edmonds levels the accusation at some point in the video. Asked about this on the Newsbud forum, Spiro Skouras says: “…there are still serious questions about their funding, what we have uncovered so far already shows that they have not been open and transparent about this, they claim that all of their trips were self funded and even held fundraisers, also claiming they stayed in the cheapest accommodations and even slept on the floors at airports due to lack of funding. We have evidence this is not entirely accurate as some of their funding been documented along with 5 star hotels, etc. There will be more follow up reports as there is still information pouring in.”

Now, if this turns out to be true, I don’t feel it completely negates the value of their reporting. The Syrian gov’t is basically the “good guy” in this story, at least among state-level players.

But, if it’s not true, can we expect a categorical denial from the pair? Even the part about the 5-star hotels, and embedding with Syrian military?

“This is a matter of an entire police force, from sea to shining sea, which insists on the gratuitous use of violence and will defend anyone who uses it.” https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1269450962952810496